Time Magazine Person of the Year: Greta Thunberg

[m308gunner | 352]

5 minutes ago, coffeewithmrsaturn said:

I may have misinterpreted the meaning of his post, but I thought he was talking about ignoring children in the sense that by not dealing with the climate problem, conservative politicians are harming the next generation who will have to bear the cost.

Ah, yes I could see that being the case.

Dealing with/addressing the merits of those points would also be an engaging conversation.

It's all largely moot though (as Wandering pointed out), considering China's and India's current trajectory. I doubt China could give less of a crap about the rest of the world or the environment. 

[Boosted52405 | 178]

Wow a surprisingly large amount of hate for the award and the recipient...I think some of you might be looking at this too directly.  She has showed limitless bravery for such a young soul on an amazingly large stage.  That should be stand up applauded and she has absolutely helped raise awareness on something extremely important for the entire globe and our future generations.  There isn't a negative to her pursuit, this is actually the perfect time and way for her to be honored IMO.

Is this not honorable for a freaking 16 year-old?

"Thunberg began a global movement by skipping school: starting in August 2018, she spent her days camped out in front of the Swedish Parliament, holding a sign painted in black letters on a white background that read Skolstrejk för klimatet: “School Strike for Climate.” In the 16 months since, she has addressed heads of state at the U.N., met with the Pope, sparred with the President of the United States and inspired 4 million people to join the global climate strike on September 20, 2019, in what was the largest climate demonstration in human history. "

https://time.com/person-of-the-year-2019-greta-thunberg/

[m308gunner | 352]

4 minutes ago, Boosted52405 said:

Wow a surprisingly large amount of hate for the award and the recipient...I think some of you might be looking at this too directly.  She has showed limitless bravery for such a young soul on an amazingly large stage.  That should be stand up applauded and she has absolutely helped raise awareness on something extremely important for the entire globe and our future generations.  There isn't a negative to her pursuit, this is actually the perfect time and way for her to be honored IMO.

Is this not honorable for a freaking 16 year-old?

"Thunberg began a global movement by skipping school: starting in August 2018, she spent her days camped out in front of the Swedish Parliament, holding a sign painted in black letters on a white background that read Skolstrejk för klimatet: “School Strike for Climate.” In the 16 months since, she has addressed heads of state at the U.N., met with the Pope, sparred with the President of the United States and inspired 4 million people to join the global climate strike on September 20, 2019, in what was the largest climate demonstration in human history. "

https://time.com/person-of-the-year-2019-greta-thunberg/

I don't see much hate (if any) for the recipient, especially since I'm not a mind reader. I do see some passionate responses to the situation and the broader way a particular ideology has pushed the issue. 

You seem to have a very high opinion of Ms. Thunberg, for the reasons you stated. Call me jaded, cynical or dead inside, but until she travels to China and addresses the heads of the communist party on their own turf about their own roles on the issue at large (and hopefully avoids getting shot or thrown in prison) I will remain unmoved by her actions and words for the reasons I have stated (and those I have not). Also please remember how young she is and what has been reported about her mental state. She is not acting alone.

[Boosted52405 | 178]

15 minutes ago, m308gunner said:

I don't see much hate (if any) for the recipient, especially since I'm not a mind reader. I do see some passionate responses to the situation and the broader way a particular ideology has pushed the issue. 

You seem to have a very high opinion of Ms. Thunberg, for the reasons you stated. Call me jaded, cynical or dead inside, but until she travels to China and addresses the heads of the communist party on their own turf about their own roles on the issue at large (and hopefully avoids getting shot or thrown in prison) I will remain unmoved by her actions and words for the reasons I have stated (and those I have not). Also please remember how young she is and what has been reported about her mental state. She is not acting alone.

Dang, it takes people risking their life to move ya ;).

Given her age especially is why I'm so moved and impressed with her.  It's also because I do strongly fear we've already destroyed our own planet to the point of no return - it started when I watched a mind numbing video recently for school regarding the ungodly amount of plastic in the oceans killing everything and that the only chance we have in addressing it is for ALL countries to join hands - that is heartbreaking.    

EDIT - P.S. - can you help me understand this part in bold?  I guess I don't know about that.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Boosted52405

[Rooster | 124]

I understand that there are other countries in the world that are polluting a significant amount, but we can't pretend like there aren't still things America can do to help protect the environment.  You can't just throw your hands up, and say not my problem, let the Chinese deal with it.  That isn't how a #1 world superpower should act.  If America is still top dog, then act like it and set an example.

[Tabonga | 2,313]

13 minutes ago, Boosted52405 said:

Wow a surprisingly large amount of hate for the award and the recipient...

I don't hate her or the award.  I personally think she is likely a puppet - but that was not the question the OP asked.

I think she was a poor choice based more on a perceived "neglected pitiful waif" sort of appeal by a group of editors (or whoever decided) who went into the process with a set of engrained biases and likely a set agenda.  IMHO there were better choices.

In any event the award has become increasingly meaningless (not that I am sure it ever was meaningful) since it is really nothing more than an opinion(s) largely based on popular media (which is increasingly fragmented and increasingly less influential in any event).  Time itself has long been eclipsed as  an influential weekly news source (along with the similarly formatted (at one time anyway) Newsweek and US News and World Report.

So I don't hate the award, I simply think it is basically a moot exercise - doesn't really matter who wins it.  How many people can name the last 5 winners off the top of their heads?  Yeah - one can look that up but that is not the same at all.

 

 

 

[Tabonga | 2,313]

2 minutes ago, Rooster said:

I understand that there are other countries in the world that are polluting a significant amount, but we can't pretend like there aren't still things America can do to help protect the environment.  You can't just throw your hands up, and say not my problem, let the Chinese deal with it.  That isn't how a #1 world superpower should act.  If America is still top dog, then act like it and set an examplet

We are veering off from the original question - the US (and most of western Europe) has made great strides - but that is meaningless if for every cubic ton of emissions reduced someone else replaces it with a much larger magnitude of emissions.  The floodwaters (as it were) are rising are they not?

And the knight in shining armor of renewable energy is at its limits.  Rare earth metals (which go into wind turbines, solar panels, batteries and catalytic converters) are being used as fast as they are produced.  Which means that there are no global stocks of these processed metals (you will see mentions of global reserves - but that is of ore still in the ground).  You can increase production but the environmental cost is horrendous - China has swaths of land destroyed by that mining and processing.  And the demand will be increased not only by new production but by the need to replace the current equipment as it ages - some of that material can be recyled but not all of it is recoverable and the recycling process is also harsh on the environment.

Yeah - you can gut the western economies - emulating Don Quixote charging at a windmill - but remember that those same economies are the ones who have the ability (and more importantly the willingness (historically)) to help  mitigate whatever changes might be down the road.  

[Sumez | 2,930]

It's pretty disturbing that "being a believer" or not is even a topic when it comes to climate change. What the hell.

This is anti-vaccination or flat earth over again. What is this, the middle ages?

[Californication | 1,477]

She spoke extremly well and when I saw her answer questions I was extremly impressed. I am not one to be moved very often, but really made an excellent emotional appeal.

[Tabonga | 2,313]

3 hours ago, Sumez said:

It's pretty disturbing that "being a believer" or not is even a topic when it comes to climate change. What the hell.

This is anti-vaccination or flat earth over again. What is this, the middle ages?

A good example of an ad hominem attack there.

There is nothing in the owners manual for the planet that says what the "ideal" temperature should be.  We (humanity) have been lucky in that we have lived in a bubble of relative stability for the 300 years or so and have come to believe that is the norm. 

The question is what is driving whatever changes are occurring - if it is part of a natural cycle the preparations needed for that (if it continues) are far different than  the current models being implemented (well sorta anyway).  Guess wrong and you have pretty much shot your bolt since we are talking a lot of resources either way.

The UN prognostications of doom and gloom are actually made of averaging a whole bunch of climate models (last count I saw  was 29 different models) together to create a "real" picture - which is in reality the worst way to do it unless you are dumb f**k lucky.   The most accurate of the models in a lotta of ways have been the Russian models INM-CN4 (and its successor INM-CN5) which have been the most reliable in hind casting -and also happen to predict much less change than the others.  And this assumes that the UN is acting with the best of intentions (ie no agenda) - something the UN has never really done on anything .

We also have a historical record that can't really be explained away with our current understanding of things - things like  the RWP, the MWP and the little ice age (to name but 3) are generally deat with  by proponents feigning ignorance or basically resorting to the old Jackie Gleason "Homina Homina"  routine.

 

[Sumez | 2,930]

I'm not gonna bite

[Tabonga | 2,313]

19 minutes ago, Sumez said:

I'm not gonna bite

 

[Sign Collector Guy | 334]

Adolf Hitler was person of the year in 1938............So there is that.  

[DoctorEncore | 3,690]

Seems fine to me.

[CodysGameRoom | 2,008]

If anything, it's nice to know VGS brings together a diverse group of people... even if some are quite strange

[CodysGameRoom | 2,008]

Trump launches snide attack on Greta Thunberg after she beats him to Time Person of the Year

 

Thoughts?

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

12 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:

Trump launches snide attack on Greta Thunberg after she beats him to Time Person of the Year

 

Thoughts?

Exactly the kind of tacky response I would have expected.

[Tulpa | 3,488]

3 hours ago, Sign Collector Guy said:

Adolf Hitler was person of the year in 1938............So there is that.  

In 1938, he did affect events more than anyone else, which is what the recognition is for.

[themisfit138 | 523]

Ha! Ha! Ha! What a joke! 

[Link | 2,708]

Hmm, why the Hong Kong protesters and not the other nominees? I can’t imagine... https://www.ibtimes.com/donald-trump-jr-sides-hong-kong-protesters-they-should-be-time-2019-person-year-2884125

13 hours ago, Wandering Tellurian said:

remember that those same economies are the ones who have the ability (and more importantly the willingness (historically)) to help  mitigate whatever changes might be down the road.  

So, you think that the entities capable of addressing the problem should do so, but not until it gets worse? 

13 hours ago, Wandering Tellurian said:

So I don't hate the award, I simply think it is basically a moot exercise - doesn't really matter who wins it.  How many people can name the last 5 winners off the top of their heads?  Yeah - one can look that up but that is not the same at all.

Can you name the last 5 Best Picture Academy Award winners?

I would look forward to seeing your answer in another year depending on who wins. Say, if they gave it to Donald again.

[empire | 106]

Shes a lil dingbat. What is skipping school to protest climate change gonna do in Sweden? They're not even close to as bad as China is for pollution.

Go protest there, or India. Then i'll give you some bravery points.

[Bearcat-Doug | 5,104]

18 hours ago, Rooster said:

I would have rather seen the HK protestors win, to be honest. 

Same here. They are risking their lives while she's flipping out on a bunch of old guys because they are more worried about their money than climate change they won't live to see.

[m308gunner | 352]

17 hours ago, Boosted52405 said:

Dang, it takes people risking their life to move ya ;).

Given her age especially is why I'm so moved and impressed with her.  It's also because I do strongly fear we've already destroyed our own planet to the point of no return - it started when I watched a mind numbing video recently for school regarding the ungodly amount of plastic in the oceans killing everything and that the only chance we have in addressing it is for ALL countries to join hands - that is heartbreaking.    

EDIT - P.S. - can you help me understand this part in bold?  I guess I don't know about that.

Heh. It should take more than theatrics to move anyone who aims to think clearly about proposing legislation that will affect millions (or all) lives. You don't want to make the person right in front of you feel good while adversely affecting the population at large. 

    To your P.S.- To my knowledge her parents play a very large role in her presentations, and she certainly did not plan a voyage across the ocean all on her lonesome. It has been reported that one of her parents has ties to Antifa (take that for what you will, personally don't care that much) and the other has a background in theater, which would certainly be self evident. 

  As to her mental state, I believe it was reported from multiple sources that she was "on the spectrum", and some have suggested that to criticize her is tantamount to criticizing her mental state, which is acting in pretty bad faith if you're aiming for truth. If she's making bad arguments and relying on emotional manipulation then she gets an automatic fail from me, regardless of her mental status. 

[Tabonga | 2,313]

4 hours ago, Link said:

 

Can you name the last 5 Best Picture Academy Award winners?

 

No I can't say that I can  -  mostly because I don't care what the film industry thinks of itself - and my taste in movies precludes most of what I am interested in being considered for an award.  If I am interested in a movie I will go see it whether it is likely to be in line for an award or not,  If it is something I don't want to see any awards (or popular opinion) is not going to convince me to see it.

My ideal movie watching conditions:

 

Edited December 12, 2019 by Wandering Tellurian

[Tabonga | 2,313]

3 hours ago, Link said:

 

So, you think that the entities capable of addressing the problem should do so, but not until it gets worse? 

I don't want those entities squandering those resources (and more importantly the ability to produce those resources) on a chimera of a solution which is essentially unattainable under the best of circumstances (which don't presently exist anyway).

If one really believes the present hypothesis the only real long term solution is a fairly drastic (and fairly immediate) reduction in global population in order to truly lower energy usage and to negate the limitations on  almost  all forms of renewable energy due to a finite capacity to provide rare earth metals.   I suppose we can trash the environment  in order to save it.  Wouldn't be the first time we destroyed a village in order to save it.