4 ms·

Greta Thinberg’s speech at the UN a few years ago is crystal clear. Climate is collapsing, it is an actionable situation, and we choose to do pretty much nothin

Greta Thinberg’s speech at the UN a few years ago is crystal clear. Climate is collapsing, it is an actionable situation, and we choose to do pretty much nothing about it. https://youtu.be/KAJsdgTPJpU?si=WvYvu1eTcEqztYtq https://youtu.be/KAJsdgTPJpU?si=WvYvu1eTcEqztYtq

germandiago 3y ago
[flagged]
- aChattuio 3y ago
  That's just not true. Read the Wikipedia article about climate change and not some random climate change denier sources.
  - germandiago 3y ago
    It is what I could find here. I have more sources but not in internet and in spanish language mostly though this is strictly an english speaking page. Why I should believe Wikipedia? I have found plenty of times inaccurate infirmation in it as well. I will let it go since it is a highly politicized topic but I think that bunch of negatives without further proof is not fair. Life is not fair though :)
    - aChattuio 3y ago
      Wikipedia has all primary sources at the bottom linked. You don't need to trust wikipedia. You should trust the sources linked. Wikipedia is basically a group collaboration on fact aggregation. Why should you believe a random blog or a blog from an oil company more than a open collaborative group project which works transparent (site history+talk feature)? You shouldn't.
      - germandiago 3y ago
        There are plenty of ways to create bias. For example, omitting relevant things, focusing on only some considered more important by some people, using impressive data to impress people with no deep idea sbout a topic without knowing how to interpret data relative to the full phenomena... the list is endless. What is a fact is that politicians and secret services, according to Pedro Baños, often enter and manipulate in subversive ways information, specifically he mentioned controversial Wikipefia articles. He is a retired military. So my advice is that we should all doubt by default about every topic that is politicized and gather information from as many sources as we can that we have a reason to trust. An open place where absolutely everyone can add and remove things is not a source I would take as primary. Yes , there are links. But the time it takes to go through all that is unfeasible for most people. My advice: choose many sources, compare. Specifically, there is nothing as enriching as putting people with different opinions face to face for a live discussion. I fo not like arguments like 80% of "experts" say... that is not an argument... and science has plenty of examples where almost everyone was wrong, from whcih this man is an example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis He was beaten to death and enjailed in a madhouse, even their mates ignored him at the time. He was right. What usually happens in these forums is that they do a lot of cherry-picking, or, at least, that is what I believe. I could be wrong, though.
- BLKNSLVR 3y ago
  > climate always changed. Over much (much much) larger timescales, with much (much much) smoother transitions (due to the timescale). Relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1732/ https://xkcd.com/1732/
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
Gud 3y ago
Why should I care about what this person thinks? What are her credentials? It seems to me, Greta Thunberg is(was?) in the spotlight because her mothers celebrity status in Sweden, granting her easy access to free PR.
- inference-lord 3y ago
  She's young and will feel the full force of some peoples ignorant stupidity.
  - vasco 3y ago
    So is every other kid born the same year, she's famous because she's famous because she's famous. But anyway, there's worse people in the limelight, to worry about her.
- gnepon 3y ago
  Her message and the way she conveyed it is, for the millions that it resonated with, more important than who her mother is or her credentials (what credentials are you expecting of a teenager?)
  - ikari_pl 3y ago
    But that's more like the problem, not an argument. it tells me people will let you do anything to them, if only you add enough emotions, otherwise they don't care.
- greysphere 3y ago
  Her credentials are her ability to rally support/interest in climate issues. What credentials would satisfy you? Folks with PhDs and political accolades have been speaking the same points for years, and clearly they haven't bread success. Frankly a question to ask is why you feel a person like her isn't encouraged to speak out on these issues, and isn't worth listening to? Is she saying things that aren't true? If so it seems like the thing to do would be to speak to those misstatements. Much more likely though, systemic sexism and ageism make it difficult for folks to accept young women in leadership roles, particularly when their message asks for change from the status quo. So the reasons you should care about what this person is saying are 1) she is speaking truths about climate change 2) the truths are about existential threats to humanity and she is able to communicate the seriousness of those threats 3) she is able to rally groups of like minded people with a common vision of those threats and their seriousness 4) paying attention to her and uplifting her leadership role helps erode systemic sexism and ageism.

germandiago 3y ago

[flagged]

aChattuio 3y ago
That's just not true. Read the Wikipedia article about climate change and not some random climate change denier sources.
- germandiago 3y ago
  It is what I could find here. I have more sources but not in internet and in spanish language mostly though this is strictly an english speaking page. Why I should believe Wikipedia? I have found plenty of times inaccurate infirmation in it as well. I will let it go since it is a highly politicized topic but I think that bunch of negatives without further proof is not fair. Life is not fair though :)
  - aChattuio 3y ago
    Wikipedia has all primary sources at the bottom linked. You don't need to trust wikipedia. You should trust the sources linked. Wikipedia is basically a group collaboration on fact aggregation. Why should you believe a random blog or a blog from an oil company more than a open collaborative group project which works transparent (site history+talk feature)? You shouldn't.
    - germandiago 3y ago
      There are plenty of ways to create bias. For example, omitting relevant things, focusing on only some considered more important by some people, using impressive data to impress people with no deep idea sbout a topic without knowing how to interpret data relative to the full phenomena... the list is endless. What is a fact is that politicians and secret services, according to Pedro Baños, often enter and manipulate in subversive ways information, specifically he mentioned controversial Wikipefia articles. He is a retired military. So my advice is that we should all doubt by default about every topic that is politicized and gather information from as many sources as we can that we have a reason to trust. An open place where absolutely everyone can add and remove things is not a source I would take as primary. Yes , there are links. But the time it takes to go through all that is unfeasible for most people. My advice: choose many sources, compare. Specifically, there is nothing as enriching as putting people with different opinions face to face for a live discussion. I fo not like arguments like 80% of "experts" say... that is not an argument... and science has plenty of examples where almost everyone was wrong, from whcih this man is an example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis He was beaten to death and enjailed in a madhouse, even their mates ignored him at the time. He was right. What usually happens in these forums is that they do a lot of cherry-picking, or, at least, that is what I believe. I could be wrong, though.
BLKNSLVR 3y ago
> climate always changed. Over much (much much) larger timescales, with much (much much) smoother transitions (due to the timescale). Relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1732/ https://xkcd.com/1732/
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Gud 3y ago

Why should I care about what this person thinks? What are her credentials? It seems to me, Greta Thunberg is(was?) in the spotlight because her mothers celebrity status in Sweden, granting her easy access to free PR.

inference-lord 3y ago
She's young and will feel the full force of some peoples ignorant stupidity.
- vasco 3y ago
  So is every other kid born the same year, she's famous because she's famous because she's famous. But anyway, there's worse people in the limelight, to worry about her.
gnepon 3y ago
Her message and the way she conveyed it is, for the millions that it resonated with, more important than who her mother is or her credentials (what credentials are you expecting of a teenager?)
- ikari_pl 3y ago
  But that's more like the problem, not an argument. it tells me people will let you do anything to them, if only you add enough emotions, otherwise they don't care.
greysphere 3y ago
Her credentials are her ability to rally support/interest in climate issues. What credentials would satisfy you? Folks with PhDs and political accolades have been speaking the same points for years, and clearly they haven't bread success. Frankly a question to ask is why you feel a person like her isn't encouraged to speak out on these issues, and isn't worth listening to? Is she saying things that aren't true? If so it seems like the thing to do would be to speak to those misstatements. Much more likely though, systemic sexism and ageism make it difficult for folks to accept young women in leadership roles, particularly when their message asks for change from the status quo. So the reasons you should care about what this person is saying are 1) she is speaking truths about climate change 2) the truths are about existential threats to humanity and she is able to communicate the seriousness of those threats 3) she is able to rally groups of like minded people with a common vision of those threats and their seriousness 4) paying attention to her and uplifting her leadership role helps erode systemic sexism and ageism.