Sep
27th
2019
I Made a Meme · 5:28am Sep 27th, 2019
Fresh OC
- Member Since 13th Jun, 2013
- offline last seen 6 hours ago
Super Trampoline
"Of all the terrible batponies in the world, you're the least terrible."~PresentPerfect🐴Ponk & GlimGlam are best ponies🐴Text 714-496-3119 with the name of an MLP character to get a cute picture!
Super Trampoline
Joined 13th Jun, 2013 ·
Offline
More Blog Posts1101
Join our SubscribeStar to remove these adverts!
Join our SubscribeStar to remove these adverts!
Stats
Page generated in 0.022 seconds
Total duration
737 users online
740,417 hits today, 2,364,530 yesterday
FIMFiction
My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic Fanfiction
Designed and coded by knighty & Xaquseg - © 2011-2024
Follow & Support Us
Support us
SubStar
Chat!
Discord
Follow us
Twitter
MLP: Friendship is Magic® - © 2024 Hasbro Inc.®
Fimfiction is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Hasbro Inc.®
greta leap forward
I always feel bad for the children people push into politics like that. I know it's been a tactic for years and years, but it still seems scummy to me.
5129153
She’s willingly taking on the spotlight though? Because she cares about our collective future.
5129182
I don't believe that to be the case, really. She's 16 years old and clearly doesn't have much of a message that isn't in front of her on a podium. I think it's a disgusting thing for her parents to do to her, to say nothing of the people insisting on these doomsday theories and preying on an autistic young girl.
In any case, any movement that uses children in such a way is a movement I'm going to ignore. Fight your own damn battles, without abusing the poor kid. She should be in school, enjoying herself, worrying about whatever boys or girls like her and doing teenager shit. Not being paraded about, and abused as a tool to play off our instinctive desire to protect children. It's a consistent political tool, and it was disgusting the first time it was done, it was disgusting when it was pulled in 1992, and it's disgusting now.
5129189
Do you not believe in human-caused climate change?
5129189
First of all, it's pretty clear that she's the one who wants to do this. She is personally passionate, not being forced into it.
Second, 16 is plenty old enough to decide to take action on something you care about.
Third, if you don't believe climate change is a major issue, you need to get with the science.
5129189
Oh, and 4, this is important:
Autism doesn't make you a fucking invalid except in the worst cases. It's a spectrum disorder and Asperger's is on the tippy tip.
My brother has more severe autism by far, and he was more than capable of caring about and articulating his concern at her age.
5129195
How many times have we been told that the world is going to end in 30 years, ten years, 8 years, etc., etc? How many times has this narrative changed when the date passed us by without anything happening?
I mean, for fuck's sake, this crap has been going on since... what, the 1970s?
In fact, here's a compilation I found with just a moment's worth of googling.
With all that said, I don't doubt humans have some effect on the climate. In fact, I'm almost certain of it. However, I don't think the destruction of our economies, the mass energy shortages, the abuses of human rights, and the loss of standards of living that most climate change policies would necessitate are justified. If we're really that worried, we should be incentivizing nuclear power, which happens to be more efficient, consistent, and safer than green energy alternatives. But, hey, Not In My Backyard, right? Just because the Soviets fucked it up and the Japanese live on a fault line.
5129210
I like nuclear power and would like it to make it more of a thing.
I looked at your link. 9+ of those were about the "new ice age" which was a popular hypothesis in the media but not a serious scientific position. At best scientists were trying to establish a likely timeline for glacial periods (the formal term), but even back then scientists knew it wouldn't happen soon. Media outlets weren't so cautious. Even if we count this, all of them count as ONE prediction that was endlessly repeated.
A few of those are individual scientists who aren't speaking from a position of consensus.
Ozone depletion was a serious issue - and then when we forced industry to be regulated wanna not produce the chemicals that were harmful, it recovered as expected.
A lot of these are news figures, individual scientists giving personal estimates, or completely without context.
I don't see a single serious study except maybe one or consensus piece among them (which is just a minor bit about methane release - a potential hazard but not a complete cause of global climate change.) Probably because (gasp) that doesn't fit the narrative.
5129200
Hey, if you want to terrify children into fighting your battles for you, that's up to you. I'm sure as hell not gonna fall for it, though, and I'm especially not going to consider you a moral person for justifying it.
Right, and next you're going to tell me that 16 is old enough to consent? To vote? Go to war? To drink alcohol and purchase a firearm? For fuck's sake, humans don't finish neurological development until age 25. I'm not going to listen to a child parroting alarmist garbage.
I didn't say it's not a major issue. Go back and reread what I said. Or, better yet, read through this. Perhaps then you'll understand my skepticism.
Yeah, but it sure has hell doesn't speak well of her parents and the adults around her that they'd use someone who doesn't necessarily have the same mental capacities as the average teenager (who are pretty easy to manipulate/stupid enough as they are) for their political pet projects.
5129219
Finally! Someone being reasonable about nuclear power. I thought this day would never come!
Ah, so then you can understand why I might be skeptical about yet another doomsday hysteria, right? Especially if it's used to justify policies that will have catastrophic human cost in liberty and livelihood? I mean, jesus, can you imagine how many people in the third world and developing nations would backslide into extreme poverty? They depend on fossil fuels for their energy needs. Can you imagine how much worse things would become for them? Hospitals with no power, no food refrigeration?
5129231
Did you ignore every single thing she said following “I looked in your link“?
5129231
The vast majority of emissions, consumption, and resource use per capita come from “developed” countries. Chiefly the United States.
Furthermore, “first world“ nations totally have the capability of spreading individualized solar technology to every person on earth. What we lack is the willpower.
5129222
Extremely misleading. Your question presumes motives which do not exist.
I don't want to "terrify" her nor anyone. I want people to be aware of a problem. If someone feels afraid because of something that's happening, that's probably just good sense.
What makes you think that I'm not fighting this battle? A lack of an international platform? I can't control global attention.
Cowardly answer.
Slippery slope bullshit.
No, I never said any of those things.
If what a sixteen year-old says is factually correct, her age is irrelevant. If a sixteen year-old wishes to approach an important project with passion, a good parent examines the risks from their perspective and decides what's best. I happen to think that her parents are great for letting her embrace this passion. She seems to be keeping up in education.
Dismissing a serious global crisis as a pet project tells me enough about how serious you are about it.
You have a weirdly warped idea of what "using" someone is. Apparently, someone who managed to capture a major global audience and willingly works with people to use their great pull is inherently "being used." I dunno how you square that circle, but you do you.
Oh fuck off, you patronizing sack of shit. The fear mongering around nuclear in environmental circles is a problem, but there's more of me than you would think.
Well, I can tell that you didn't actually read my rebuttal, which squares with your utter lack of skepticism regarding the material in the link. I'm familiar with all of it because I've studied the issue, and the stuff you presented is full of shit. I've studied the actual studies and attended conferences - that ain't it.
I practice methodological skepticism. It is a process of verifying truth claims. You will find that most people who practice methodological skepticism and refer to themselves as skeptics on a formal basis agree with the conclusions of the consensus of scientists articulating concern about the reality and potential negative effects of anthropogenic climate change.
Good place to start. There are dozens more, and it answers your link if you look around.
You, sir or madam, misuse the term skeptic to replace it with childish doubt and ignorant denial. You are not a climate skeptic, you are a climate denier, and frankly Greta sounds like a more mature person than you.
Good day.
5129247
Pretty much, but the stuff after wasn't relevant to illustrating my point. If "wolf!" has been cried 14 times, and each and every time there has been no wolf, why on god's green earth would I listen on the 15th time? Why especially would I listen when shit like the Green New Deal, the supposed holy grail of policies in the fight against climate change, is actually a trojan horse for the introduction of socialism as revealed by one of its contributors?
Climate change is an issue, but all the proposed solutions are, thus far, garbage.
5129252
China also happens to have a population four times that of the United States. So Per Capita doesn't really concern me so much as the fact that their emissions are nearly double our own, and they have taken very few steps to curb their emissions, UNLIKE the west. Hell, since 2000 China has more than doubled their carbon emissions, while the US and EU have cut ours by a collective 26%. Oh, and India's increased by about 1.5x since 2000 as well, IIRC.
I'm not going to consent to the destruction of my nation and millions of lives on the word of the boy who cried wolf.
Annnnnnnd here we go with the redistributionism again.
Actually, I have to ask, if China and the developing world refuse to change to renewable sources, would you endorse their destruction? If they continue to use fossil fuels and say "fuck off" every time they're told to adhere to climate accords and treaties, would you endorse the invasion of China or India with the express purpose of destroying their carbon emissions?
5129293
Because all of those times you mentioned were not serious, as you would have seen if you'd actually read my post, which contradicts your shitty link.
You expect us to read everything you say and present but do not hew to that standard yourself. You are a disingenuous asshole who has no interest in genuine engagement and are no longer worth my time.
Fuck off.
5129293
Today on “conservatives approaching the point“: you are absolutely correct, capitalism is one of the major drivers of climate change!
5129260
Oh god help us, you're an internet lawyer. Now all we need are some Phoenix Wright memes and we'll be all set.
The only one defending the use of a child fear-mongered into politics here is you. So, presumably, you agree with that. But hey, it's your right to agree or disagree with whatever you like.
Given that "making people aware" of the problem involves terrifying this poor kid and pressing her into the public spotlight about a supposed doomsday that I sincerely doubt will ever come*.... yeah, I don't think that's ever going to be okay.
Here's where we disagree. I do not think that playing into the atmosphere of existential terror does a child any good. I especially do not think that the existence of climate change justifies using a child for political purposes. Ends don't justify the means.
Not the point I'm making when I say "you're getting a child to fight your battles for you."
Right, like I'm going to give any moral weight to what you say, given what you're defending. Sure. If you don't need children to fight your battles, then surely you don't mind keeping Greta in school, out of this conversation, where she's not constantly exposed to fear-mongering about a climate doomsday? At bare minimum, surely you'd agree that she hasn't added anything new to the discussion?
TL;DR - She should be in school, as she herself said, not taken advantage of by the cynical, politically motivated adults in her life. If she's not adding anything new to the discussion, you shouldn't mind leaving her out of it until she reaches an age where she has agency under the law.
Jesus Christ, forget internet lawyering, this is almost as bad as arguing with that kid in high school that said everything was a "logical fallacy."
(Yeah, Terrence, I still remember you pulling that crap every other sentence in our mock debate on WW3 for history class, and I still haven't forgiven you. Fuck you, man.)
I know you didn't, but I faux-predicted that you would say those things to make a point. Ah well, here's another one for r/whoooooosh. The point I'm illustrating is that there exist MANY, MANY areas where the opinions of children are disregarded because they are CHILDREN. They are not fully developed. They are not well-informed. They are not capable of a multitude of actions under both the law and in the eyes of society.
So, given this fact, why on god's green earth would I give any weight whatsoever to the parroted political opinions of a child? I'm not objecting to her saying, yo, guys. Climate change is real.
Then it doesn't damn well need to come out of a child's mouth, now does it? If it's factually the case, an ADULT could be saying these things instead, rather than relying on a child to play on people's heartstrings. But that's NOT the issue here, is it?
Because she's NOT just saying, "Hey guys, climate change is real." She's asking an international body for SPECIFIC policy prescriptions. So, fuck that.
Well, I happen to disagree with turning any child into a political prop and terrorizing her with doomsday theories, but, hey. What do I know? If they want to do that to their kid, and the left isn't going to take a stand against that kind of abuse, that's their right. I'm not going to find it palatable, and it's definitely not going to garner any sympathy from me for their movement.
You know, I hate playing this card, but for god's sake: reading comprehension. I've already mentioned I believe that climate change is a thing, so obviously "pet project" isn't referring to that. How about those specific policies laid out by the left with regards to climate change? Could those possibly be what I'm referring to? Maybe, I don't know, shit like the Green New Deal? The Paris Climate Accords? Things that do more damage to the United States and her citizens and their wellbeing than I believe is justified? To say nothing about the damage to developing nations?
Or, I know, as long as we're reading each other's minds here, maybe you should stop looking for an excuse to dismiss my opinions and instead, I dunno, pay attention to the text on screen?
Riiiiight, so if that 16 year old willingly decides to go to bed with a 30 year old, she isn't being used?
If that 16 year old decides hey, maybe drinking this Kool-aid isn't such a bad idea after all, she's not being used?
Suppose a 16 year decides that, oh my god, those morons on 4chan were right, we definitely need to start a race war, it's for the survival of the west as we know it! Is he being used?
If a 16 year old goes, Gee Golly Willickers, these Rotheram fellers are real noice and they gave me things in return for doing stuff, she isn't being used?
How about a 16 year old who's been told that all the problems in the world could be solved by the emergence of a new white ethnostate? Are they being used?
How about a 16 year old who, for the entirety of her life has been told, day after day, that the world is going to end if we don't do some very specific somethings about climate change right now! How about if she's told she's not even going to have a future, that she should panic, and that unless these very specific things are done exactly the way your parents and the people they agree with tell you, sweetie, you're going to die?
Now let's say this 16 year old doesn't even necessarily have the same mental faculties of an average teenager, who (as I'm certain we are both well aware) are already very easily swayed into society-changing movements that set the rest of the world as the enemy and the movement alone as the source of justice and positive change. How the hell is that okay?
Ouch. My poor, poor feelings. I'm so hurt. So dreadfully, woefully injured. My ego shall never recover. Oh, Lord have mercy, someone insulted me over the internet. How will I go on living?
Finally! Something we can agree on besides the existence of climate change. Now, if only more of you nuclear proponents would rear your heads when the climate hysterics start, we could maybe get somewhere!
We have an alternative to fossil fuels RIGHT HERE, but nooooo, toss that out the window in favor of destructive wind farms (gotta feel sorry for the birds and the bats) and bloody solar farms (ah, yes, heavy metals my old friend). Now we just need to open up Yucca mountain and we'll be all set.
Nah, see, here you go again with the r/whoooooosh crap. I read the rebuttal, but it wasn't relevant to my poi- ah, nevermind, looks like you added another comment, so let's look at that one.
Ooooh, so they weren't "serious." I see now! My eyes have been opened! I was blind, but now I see! Clearly, this one random person on the internet calling all those cried wolfs irrelevant holds more weight than all of them!
Actually, I don't expect you to read anything. The instant you came in hot, I knew that the likelihood of this conversation changing anyone's mind was in the negatives. That said, I mostly said that because I figured I'd give you
something shiny to play withsomething to do when you saw it after hitting "reload" for the umpteenth time, and god knows I can't resist throwing a bone to someone waiting for a reply. Besides, weren't you getting bored after running out of comments to downvote?Oh. Be still my bleeding heart. This wound, so deep and grave, is a gaping chasm in my chest. A pox on your house, person of low reading comprehension. A pox.
Anyways, moving on....
Oh, a skepticTM. Next you're going to start lecturing me about material reality and how we're all brains in vats, right? Bring up Huemer, or maybe Descartes? Oh! We can talk about Elon Musk and the computer program theory of reality!
Also, r/whooosh.
Uh. Again, r/whooooosh. (You know, now that I think about it, I'm not sure how many "o's" I should be using there.) I'm not denying that climate change exists. What I am denying is that the policy prescriptions as laid out will be a good thing, as I think they will do more harm than good. I'm not willing to force people into suffering for the sake of first world self-flagellation.
Oh My God. Okay, now I'm legitimately insulted. Calling ME a skeptic? Oof. That's a step too far, way out of bounds, beyond the pale, even! For shame, madam! For SHAME! Oh, and I guess we have another tally for the r/whoosh counter.
You too! :)
Anyways, if you do cool off and want to have a chill convo about what I think we SHOULD do about climate change, feel free to hit me up.
*(EDIT because I KNOW you're gonna seize on this one phrasing as PROOF PILLBUG IS A CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER!!!11!!one!!!!11eleven!!!: I doubt it'll come because we'll find a way to solve the problem without forcing millions of people into sub-par living conditions and crazy climate austerity. When in doubt, don't bet against human ingenuity.)
5129348
Do you really want me to go and dig up all the numbers on just how godawful socialism is? The body counts? The famines? The shortages? I can't possibly be the first person to have brought this up, so why can't you just let go of the bloodiest ideology on the planet?
5129361
First of all, capitalism kills 20,000,000 people every year.
Second of all absolutely. Let’s do this. I have plenty of time and plenty of sources.
5129371
Given the population boom under capitalism and the incredible standards of living.... oh, did I mention the 80% reduction in world extreme poverty rate? The freedoms people enjoy? Hell, in the USA our poor people are FAT.
In any case, I think you should try to take that number and compare it to what it would be under, say, communism? If capitalism, the most prosperous and free system mankind has yet adopted, operates at a loss of 20m people each year, how bad do you think it was under every system that came before us?
At least under capitalism we don't have to worry about murdering kulaks. Or the Holodomor. Or gulags, or purges. Or "Great Leaps Forward." Or struggle sessions. I mean, seriously.
5129374
Come on man, I want to hear some numbers. I want to hear about how many tens of millions of people communism has killed. Or is it up to hundreds of millions now? I forget; they’re always changing the number.
5129379
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes#Estimates
Well, we can start with the basic bitch that is wikipedia; it's certainly going to be less biased than communismdeathcountpoliticsragebait2000.com. And even the lowball numbers are double or triple the Holocaust.
Out of curiosity, what's the source on the 20m/yr? I'm kinda curious on how they reached that total.
I suppose another question we should be asking is which is worse? 20m/yr as an unintended consequence of capitalistic mechanisms, or however many more/yr as a result of intentional ideologically motivated action? And I guess we should be weighing cost in innovation and freedoms, too. God knows central planning is garbage for that.
Dammit, I keep thinking up questions. How would the system that would replace capitalism work? Obviously it's not communism, given how that's gone every single time it's tried, but what would this hypothetical system look like? How would it prove itself more effective/free/useful than capitalism?