• Greta Thunberg condemns UK's climate stance in speech to MPs
    18 replies, posted
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/23/vacant-seat-for-may-as-party-leaders-meet-greta-thunberg?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR18TLaXzDglnQtz04yQahjuAoGoMk-l6kjigKN-Q_VKzRaOgNlwqsdVok0#Echobox=1556025603 The UK government’s active support for fossil fuels and airport expansion is “beyond absurd”, Greta Thunberg has told MPs. The 16-year-old Swedish student, who sparked a global youth-based movement when she began a “climate strike” outside Sweden’s parliament last year, gave a typically blunt speech. She told MPs: “This ongoing irresponsible behaviour will no doubt be remembered in history as one of the greatest failures of humankind.” Thunberg, who had earlier met the heads of several of the UK’s political parties, also said today’s generation of leaders around the world had not acted fast enough to halt climate change. “You lied to us. You gave us false hope. You told us that the future was something to look forward to,” she said. “You don’t listen to the science because you are only interested in solutions that will enable you to carry on like before.” This girl is so fucking cool. The BBC did an interview with her recently too. I didn't know she had Asperger's. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-48018034/climate-change-activist-greta-thunberg-listen-to-climate-scientists
Not sure whether I should be blown away at this girl's courage and tanacity, or anguished by the fact that this is what it's come to, because our adult politicians are so stupid and/or corrupt that they are completely incapable of addressing climate change.
I'm with you there. This advert perfectly captures the dynamic between the young and older establishment on this issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwKDxHM88HY
This doesn't surprises me in the slightest, and I have no idea why this is news. That's a bold statement, yes, almost like a shitpost or something, but hear me out. I think everyone shares her sentiment. Everyone that doesn't has their pockets filled with fossil fuel money would rather wake up to a more greener, healthier Earth. It boggles my mind to think that anyone at all could think that she is the only person who thinks like that. We, and when I mean we I mean the leaders, should be looking at her not as Greta Thunberg, but as The People. Because we all share her sentiments, we imo are well represented by her feeling, we just sadly can't be heard speaking... We shouldn't have to make this news, but its just like she says I guess. They look for the more convenient solution for the time being, that fits their needs the best, disregarding if it was actually helpful for the better being of their people.
Until politicians can see that not taking the action required will cost them a significant amount of votes, we aren't going to get anything beyond small token gestures. While everyone generally wants a "greener" future, a lot of the public simply don't make it a key issue when it comes to who they vote for.
This girl is the most badass people are seriously suggesting she is an AI
Don't get me wrong - a lot of people have the same opinions as her, but there are still huge segments of the population who don't receive fossil fuel money who believe Climate Change to be a hoax. I do think she deserves extra credit for sitting outside Swedish parliament for weeks with her sign though. She wasn't causing disruption to people's day, she was just telling people politely how much they fucked up.
I have to agree with that. She shows so much passion and drive for it in a very passive yet extremely marking way, that she managed to get seen real good. It's just sad the people who should care don't care about it enough. I blame those crazies on the leaders though. Some governments don't do it right with education. Like, at all.
She doesn't, she has Autism. Asperger's is not a recognized mental disorder anymore and hasn't been for years.
Autism and Asperger's are considered identical in many places and my cousin was only diagnosed with literal Asperger's 3 years ago in the UK. I don't know why you've decided to pick out a semantic complaint with that word when not every country works the exact same way.
Where I am from, Aspergers and Autism mean the same thing as Aspergers is part of the Autism Spectrum. So you're Autistic eitherway.
The DSM removed the diagnosis in favor of ASD, the ICD still lists it but as a subtype of Autism. It's just incorrect semantics and I see people flaunt this trait a lot. It's ridiculous and annoying. Neither the interviewer nor she is educated in the field of psychology. It's about as outdated as calling people with ASPD "sociopaths". Moving on.
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/242634/cc0291a4-b496-4506-a0d4-9ebd534a37dc/image.png Not everywhere is America. Britain tends to use the WHO ICD and that still includes Asperger's. This passage is from the NHS website too.
I'm Swedish, dude.
Well, fair enough, but I'm just using the term I'm familiar with in this country and the one she used. I don't think it's terribly important, at any rate. It's possible she referred to it as Asperger's because the BBC interviewer cut out was asking her about it in a language they understood and she was just making things easier for them out of courtesy.
I agree - we need to make a move towards nuclear power. Unlike Solar or Wind, they are actually solutions which are cost effective, cause very little (albiet not zero) waste and churn out boatloads of energy to boot. Wait, that's not her stance? Well how do.
I think you're right on the nuclear power thing, but it's difficult to convince countries to pay for nuclear power plants because they're extremely expensive, even though they will pay for themselves in the long-run. Also, a lot of people hear 'nuclear' and think that means explosions, which is a pretty difficult thing to change people's minds on.
In environmental debates, it's also a middle of the road option that doesn't suit anyones agenda. You can't argue for more productivity vs environmental concerns when the best option creates a lot of power and little environmental impact - what impact it does create (spent fuel rods) are very easily controlled, and more modern reactors have ways of recycling them altogether. Naturally, instead of the goto solution, all parties just wring their hands while yelling that the other side is inhuman.
Could be an AI from the future
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.