The “anti-Greta”
Discussion
smn159 said:
Bonkers, isn't it
it certainly is but that's the UN for you. If you believe that modern capitalism is at the heart of environmental woes with its reliance on cheap energy, and that environmental woes prevent you meeting many of your goals for standards of living around the world then there's only one answer: capitalism must die.
This paper was submitted to the UN who were asked the scientists to contribute research for the U.N. Global Sustainable Development Report (GSDR):
https://bios.fi/bios-governance_of_economic_transi... (pdf)
"all people capable and willing to
work would be able to get a permanent, state-funded, and locally administered job. The most suitable jobs for the program would be those that almost anyone can do with limited training. The jobs could be modeled to serve the transition to sustainability and to build capacities to adapt to climate change: for
example, installing decentralized energy solutions and preparing for floods. In addition to triggering the transition, the job guarantee would ensure full employment. It would lessen insecurity and the need to compete for environmentally destructive jobs on the individual and the collective level."
"In rich countries, citizens would have less purchasing power than now, but it would be distributed more equally. Citizens in all countries would have access to meaningful jobs and they could trust that a desirable future is being constructed on the collective level."
Ah, love the smell of socialism in the morning.
The last paragraph sounds familiar:
"In view of the challenges encountered today in implementing meaningful international agreements, the most likely option for initiating transitions to sustainability would be for a group of progressive states to take the lead. This would require economic thinking that enables large public investment programs on the one hand and strong regulation and environmental caps on the other. In the modern global economy, states are the only actors that have the legitimacy and capacity to fund and organize large-scale transitions."
jshell said:
smn159 said:
Silkyskills said:
So the UN are actively trying to undermine or bring to an end western capitalism?
Bonkers, isn't it
The devaluation of fossil fuel reserves will inevitably lead to some redistribution of wealth but it's a consequence of ceasing to use fossil fuels not the actual goal of climate policy.
When we send aid to Africa we are redistributing wealth but we're not trying to bring in communism in the UK at the same time.
The EELI (a big oil linked organisation) created this meme and even substituted the word politics with policy. The actual quote was in German. It would also appear that when he was talking about this he was actually being sympathetic to big oil concerns.
http://variable-variability.blogspot.com/2017/08/o...
How climate science deniers manufacture quotes to convince you the United Nations is one big socialist plot:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.desmogblog.com/20...
Gadgetmac said:
Not this tired old denier meme distorting what he was actually saying...jeez. TB used to love posting this one and I suspect that's where you got it from.
The devaluation of fossil fuel reserves will inevitably lead to some redistribution of wealth but it's a consequence of ceasing to use fossil fuels not the actual goal of climate policy.
When we send aid to Africa we are redistributing wealth but we're not trying to bring in communism in the UK at the same time.
The EELI (a big oil linked organisation) created this meme and even substituted the word politics with policy. The actual quote was in German. It would also appear that when he was talking about this he was actually being sympathetic to big oil concerns.
http://variable-variability.blogspot.com/2017/08/o...
How climate science deniers manufacture quotes to convince you the United Nations is one big socialist plot:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.desmogblog.com/20...
Spin IMHO.The devaluation of fossil fuel reserves will inevitably lead to some redistribution of wealth but it's a consequence of ceasing to use fossil fuels not the actual goal of climate policy.
When we send aid to Africa we are redistributing wealth but we're not trying to bring in communism in the UK at the same time.
The EELI (a big oil linked organisation) created this meme and even substituted the word politics with policy. The actual quote was in German. It would also appear that when he was talking about this he was actually being sympathetic to big oil concerns.
http://variable-variability.blogspot.com/2017/08/o...
How climate science deniers manufacture quotes to convince you the United Nations is one big socialist plot:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.desmogblog.com/20...
Politics or policy, same meaning.
Whether he's sympathetic to oil companies or not the effects of keeping oil in the ground are as he describes.
Viner did say, however, "children just aren't going to know what snow is"
(assuming the now disappeared Independent article quoted verbatim of course! The worlds-most-viewed-site-on climate-who-must-not-be-named
has archived a copy here)"This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history
"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution."
Christiana Figueres
https://archive.unric.org/en/latest-un-buzz/29623-...
(I believe that's a primary source)
Perhaps it's tinfoil hattery, but if so The Washington Times must also be partaking:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.washingtontimes.c...
"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution."
Christiana Figueres
https://archive.unric.org/en/latest-un-buzz/29623-...
(I believe that's a primary source)
Perhaps it's tinfoil hattery, but if so The Washington Times must also be partaking:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.washingtontimes.c...
jagnet said:
"This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history
"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution."
Christiana Figueres
https://archive.unric.org/en/latest-un-buzz/29623-...
(I believe that's a primary source)
Perhaps it's tinfoil hattery, but if so The Washington Times must also be partaking:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.washingtontimes.c...
And that in your mind means she is advocating a communist/socialist revolution?"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution."
Christiana Figueres
https://archive.unric.org/en/latest-un-buzz/29623-...
(I believe that's a primary source)
Perhaps it's tinfoil hattery, but if so The Washington Times must also be partaking:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.washingtontimes.c...
And thats clearly labelled as an opinion piece.
I noticed anti-Greta was being quizzed by Piers Morgan on the morning TV today.
Piers called in their weather girl climate expert to rebut anti-greta's claims that there was no emergency with a disguised hockey stick graphic.
Instead of the typical hockey stick, they had pictured it with a grouping of worrying red colour lines, instead of a 'y' axis in which the hockey stick would usually 'head north' on.
No other data, just a colourful graphic acting in substitute to the usual discredited Mann's hockey stick of old.
So from that viewers were being told that the red lines meant 'crisis'.
"Its all about the rate of change that is the problem", the weather girl said. Well sure, if data is manipulated to cool the past and warm the present, and then computer models are told to show severe warming in the future, I don't think anybody needs a graphic to show that such a trend is 'worrying'. Not for the planet of course, but for the credibility of science.
Piers called in their weather girl climate expert to rebut anti-greta's claims that there was no emergency with a disguised hockey stick graphic.
Instead of the typical hockey stick, they had pictured it with a grouping of worrying red colour lines, instead of a 'y' axis in which the hockey stick would usually 'head north' on.
No other data, just a colourful graphic acting in substitute to the usual discredited Mann's hockey stick of old.
So from that viewers were being told that the red lines meant 'crisis'.
"Its all about the rate of change that is the problem", the weather girl said. Well sure, if data is manipulated to cool the past and warm the present, and then computer models are told to show severe warming in the future, I don't think anybody needs a graphic to show that such a trend is 'worrying'. Not for the planet of course, but for the credibility of science.
jet_noise said:
Gadgetmac said:
Not this tired old denier meme distorting what he was actually saying...jeez. TB used to love posting this one and I suspect that's where you got it from.
The devaluation of fossil fuel reserves will inevitably lead to some redistribution of wealth but it's a consequence of ceasing to use fossil fuels not the actual goal of climate policy.
When we send aid to Africa we are redistributing wealth but we're not trying to bring in communism in the UK at the same time.
The EELI (a big oil linked organisation) created this meme and even substituted the word politics with policy. The actual quote was in German. It would also appear that when he was talking about this he was actually being sympathetic to big oil concerns.
http://variable-variability.blogspot.com/2017/08/o...
How climate science deniers manufacture quotes to convince you the United Nations is one big socialist plot:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.desmogblog.com/20...
Spin IMHO.The devaluation of fossil fuel reserves will inevitably lead to some redistribution of wealth but it's a consequence of ceasing to use fossil fuels not the actual goal of climate policy.
When we send aid to Africa we are redistributing wealth but we're not trying to bring in communism in the UK at the same time.
The EELI (a big oil linked organisation) created this meme and even substituted the word politics with policy. The actual quote was in German. It would also appear that when he was talking about this he was actually being sympathetic to big oil concerns.
http://variable-variability.blogspot.com/2017/08/o...
How climate science deniers manufacture quotes to convince you the United Nations is one big socialist plot:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.desmogblog.com/20...
Politics or policy, same meaning.
I for one have never denied that the Earths climate is changing, because that is precisely what it has done for over 4.6 billion years, it s doing it now, and will carry on doing for eternity, (or at least until the sun dies)
I don't even argue against the idea that man has had some effect on the planets climate, or the idea that the change being seen now, whilst not unprecedented, is possibly as fast, or faster than some other climate change events the Earth has undergone.
What seems to be shocking however is the way some people only want to look at what is happening, but seem to want stop there and try to avoid looking at what is at the root cause as far as humans are concerned.
Some even refuse to see the stark similarity between the rise in emissions output, and the rise in the global human population.
Lay the hockey stick graph, over the graph showing human population growth, and surprise, surprise, there is a remarkable match.
I doubt that we have any more control over human population levels than we do over the Earths climate, and this being the case, we will, like lemmings over run the planet and its resources, and like lemmings pay the corresponding price for doing so.
By following the teachings of Thunberg et al, we might prolong our tenure on this planet for a little longer..
But this eco clap trap is just dicking around at the edges, so that some can salve their consciences, with the thought that they are doing `something'
We can re cycle our condoms, knit our own orgasms, and compost our tea bags, and carry out other such `world saving' strategies as much as we like, but in the planetary scale of the already colossal human population, and its effect not just on the climate, but on every habitat, and other species we are supposedly sharing the Earth with, it will make little, or no difference in the end whilst we carry on as we are doing now More humans means less of everything else.
I don't even argue against the idea that man has had some effect on the planets climate, or the idea that the change being seen now, whilst not unprecedented, is possibly as fast, or faster than some other climate change events the Earth has undergone.
What seems to be shocking however is the way some people only want to look at what is happening, but seem to want stop there and try to avoid looking at what is at the root cause as far as humans are concerned.
Some even refuse to see the stark similarity between the rise in emissions output, and the rise in the global human population.
Lay the hockey stick graph, over the graph showing human population growth, and surprise, surprise, there is a remarkable match.
I doubt that we have any more control over human population levels than we do over the Earths climate, and this being the case, we will, like lemmings over run the planet and its resources, and like lemmings pay the corresponding price for doing so.
By following the teachings of Thunberg et al, we might prolong our tenure on this planet for a little longer..
But this eco clap trap is just dicking around at the edges, so that some can salve their consciences, with the thought that they are doing `something'
We can re cycle our condoms, knit our own orgasms, and compost our tea bags, and carry out other such `world saving' strategies as much as we like, but in the planetary scale of the already colossal human population, and its effect not just on the climate, but on every habitat, and other species we are supposedly sharing the Earth with, it will make little, or no difference in the end whilst we carry on as we are doing now More humans means less of everything else.
Jinx said:
Gadgetmac said:
The devaluation of fossil fuel reserves will inevitably lead to some redistribution of wealth but it's a consequence of ceasing to use fossil fuels not the actual goal of climate policy.
Why?Although you wouldn't actually be handing anything over to your neighbour the total value of your asset has just been reduced and the financial gap between the two of you has shrunk. To capitalists that's redistribution of wealth.
Gadgetmac said:
Have a think about why the devaluation of your asset (it's oil but you can substitute it for your property value to make it easier to understand) might reduce the gap in wealth between you and a neighbour who doesn't possess that asset or at least the same asset with the same value.
Although you wouldn't actually be handing anything over to your neighbour the total value of your asset has just been reduced and the financial gap between the two of you has shrunk. To capitalists that's redistribution of wealth.
That's not the redistribution of waelth the UN is aiming for though is it?Although you wouldn't actually be handing anything over to your neighbour the total value of your asset has just been reduced and the financial gap between the two of you has shrunk. To capitalists that's redistribution of wealth.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff