Greta hitches a ride on La Vagabonde

[senormechanico]

Originally Posted by Tortuga's Lie

I am not usually one for spewing politics as I know there are passionate people on both sides of the fence and have strong opinions with factoids that will support their beliefs, so I will not venture too deep into the murky waters. What I will say and ask is what harm does it do to be the best stewards of our planet?? I know I may sound a bit naive, but I'm not really as I know that there's a cost associated with carbon reductions and government restrictions but isn't there an equal amount to be made in support of green technologies? Again, why can't we do what's best for the environment??

Who's environment? By reducing carbon dioxide in the air, you are starving plants.

I thought the "Greenies" were taking their namesake from plants.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by TBW

She is SIXTEEN for crying out loud!!
Sixteen!
Who among us did anything like this when we were sixteen?
She should get credit and support.
Nothing less. Nothing else.
TW

When most of us were 16 we'd have got a clip round the ear and told to shut up and stop being stupid.
Earth abuse protests are nothing new.. what is new is Social Media Instant Stardom from needy folks looking for wagons to hitch on to.
Yes I saw her face.. now I'm a believer..
Not a trace.. of doubt in my mind..

[tarian]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Asperger’s is not a learning disability.
People with Asperger’s will have an average or above average IQ.

Just for Clarification Asperger's Syndrome for Girls is different to that of boys and the social interaction between girls speaking with aspergers to people may come across as lecturing or I told you so this is an aspect of social interaction they will suffer from they also find it hard to read people and understand their meaning and have a passion which borders on obsession on subjects and hobbies they will find it difficult to speak openly with curt language that we might find rude (I do not )
Were in my world of knowledge coming from , My 9 year old daughter has Aspergers Syndrome and I as a male have it to
Publicity for the Vloggers and all their sponsors but good for her to keep to her principles about sailing across and not flying , the message is pretty clear we need to wake up to climate change, married to a climate change Dr of Ecology it is real and we are seeing the effects already denial is futile

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by TBW

She is SIXTEEN for crying out loud!!

Sixteen!

Who among us did anything like this when we were sixteen?

She should get credit and support.

Nothing less. Nothing else.

TW

That is exactly the point.
Do you really think that in her early teen years or pre-teen years she formed these opinions herself?
Or is it just possible that she is being manipulated by others, and mostly parroting the opinions of others, likely her parents I’d assume.

A difference is that my parents would not have used their children to further their beliefs.

However most of you guys have never raised or been around Asperger kids.

Something about an Aspie is that they are insanely curious, for example,e one may become interested in photography. They can discuss f stops, different lenses, and types of film and developing film with a level of understanding that would astonish an expert, if your a photographer, you’ll come away amazed at how smart that kid is.

However if you give them a camera and ask them to take a photo, most couldn’t.

It’s not until later in life that they take that knowledge that is all theoretical and put it to use and gain experience, and that is when they become actual experts, up until that time, they are parroting things they have read about.

[Arthurwg]

Sorry Greta, but there's nothing anyone can do to reverse the climate situation. It's not coming, it's already here. Yes, it will probably get worse, but it's been at least 150 years in the making, starting with the industrial revolution. Stop all that flying? British Airways has over 800 flights a day, all of them releasing greenhouse gasses into the upper atmosphere, and that's just one airline. Add cars, motorbikes, forest fires, cow flatulence and termite emissions and it's overwhelming. The best we can hope for is to adapt, and try not to drown, freeze or burn to a crisp.

But I'm glad she likes sailing.

[250224]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

That is exactly the point.
Do you really think that in her early teen years or pre-teen years she formed these opinions herself?

You are surely able to form such opinions imo. And likely you are more sensitive with 14-16-18 years than later when pragmatism has set in. (Or you become an obnoxious ideologic)

[tarian]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

That is exactly the point.
Do you really think that in her early teen years or pre-teen years she formed these opinions herself?
Or is it just possible that she is being manipulated by others, and mostly parroting the opinions of others, likely her parents I’d assume.

A difference is that my parents would not have used their children to further their beliefs.

However most of you guys have never raised or been around Asperger kids.

Something about an Aspie is that they are insanely curious, for example,e one may become interested in photography. They can discuss f stops, different lenses, and types of film and developing film with a level of understanding that would astonish an expert, if your a photographer, you’ll come away amazed at how smart that kid is.

However if you give them a camera and ask them to take a photo, most couldn’t.

It’s not until later in life that they take that knowledge that is all theoretical and put it to use and gain experience, and that is when they become actual experts, up until that time, they are parroting things they have read about.

Your opinion and writing about so called Aspies seems almost derogatory (I take it as that as some one who has AS S and my daughter ) , my 9 year is 2 years ahead in her class and has a better understanding of many things that certain adults would struggle with , each person with aspergers will be totally different do not put them all together and it is a scandal that you think a 16 year old cannot have their own opinion , this all started with Greta taking action in her local school and it spread across social media and went global she did not ask for this but become a beacon of hope for the youth
It makes me chuckle that most climate deniers and those willing to scoff at those trying to highlight the problem comes for m the older generation stuck in their ways generation .

[250224]

Originally Posted by Tortuga's Lie

Blu,
I do not disagree or argue about your statements or the articles (nice read by the way) but it is my hope that we as a human race will be able to be a bit more proactive towards protecting the Earth as much as we can.

Thanks. Yes I hope that too.

[tarian]

Originally Posted by blu3534

You are surely able to form such opinions imo. And likely you are more sensitive with 14-16-18 years than later when pragmatism has set in. (Or you become an obnoxious ideologic)

I think you hit the nail on the head there

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Do you really think that in her early teen years or pre-teen years she formed these opinions herself?
Or is it just possible that she is being manipulated by others, and mostly parroting the opinions of others, likely her parents I’d assume.

A difference is that my parents would not have used their children to further their beliefs.

If I understand the information given here and elsewhere, people in the Aspergers spectrum form strong interests and go deep. Greta apparently got interested in the subject of climate change around the age of 9. So... seven years of intense focus on the subject.

I also understand that it's pretty hard to make them do something they don't want to do (jeez, hard enough with any 16 year old).

Is it not possible that she's put in the work, read widely and deeply on the subject, and is appalled that so many people deny or dismiss it?

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by Exile

...Maybe someone can calculate how the economies of scale of a single seat on an airplane compares...

For starters, you can consider that an airliner gets over 60 seat-miles (statute) per gallon (depending on seating configuration and % loaded). Flying one person from Virginia to Spain uses around 60 US gallons of ~diesel.

Airliners, like them or not, are integral to the economy while pleasure sailing is not. Consider all the diesel burned not just in sailboat engines and generators, but in sea/aircraft making fumes to rescue pleasure sailors in peril. This is a huge amount of fuel. Airliners can/do move stuff quickly great distances (e.g. across oceans) somewhat irrespective of pleasure airline travel. So for all the ~carbon footprint associated with huge airplanes, some amount of that carbon footprint is globally accepted.

Me in my sailboat vs me in my cabin in the woods.....my sailboat, and others like it, produce an unnecessary huge carbon footprint. But I suppose I'm not supposed to think this way in this kind of discussion.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by tarian

Your opinion and writing about so called Aspies seems almost derogatory (I take it as that as some one who has AS S and my daughter ) , my 9 year is 2 years ahead in her class and has a better understanding of many things that certain adults would struggle with , each person with aspergers will be totally different do not put them all together and it is a scandal that you think a 16 year old cannot have their own opinion , this all started with Greta taking action in her local school and it spread across social media and went global she did not ask for this but become a beacon of hope for the youth
It makes me chuckle that most climate deniers and those willing to scoff at those trying to highlight the problem comes for m the older generation stuck in their ways generation .

It makes me chuckle that, in the same paragraph no less, you complain about a perceived derogatory comment that you believe unfairly lumps all Asperger's kids together, but then use the term "denier" which does exactly that with people who question the prevailing conformity surrounding the CC issue. Those who push back on this conformity do so for a wide variety of reasons and not just because they necessarily "deny" that CC exists. Use of the denier/denial/deny label only demonstrates blind conformity, and therefore undercuts the credibility of those who are sincerely advocating for change.

[S/V Adeline]

When I was in grade school there were after school specials usually dealing with science. One such that I remember distinctly dealt with earth history and climate patterns.
Going back over a million years every 65,000yrs average, there is a major climate shift. Warming followed by a global temp drop averaging 5-15 degrees (F).
Evidence showed the last shift was approximately 67,000yrs ago.
Cycle was documented covering over a million years, long before humans or our pollution.
The climate cycle is real. The shift is actually past due. Nothing can stop it.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Singularity

For starters, you can consider that an airliner gets over 60 seat-miles (statute) per gallon (depending on seating configuration and % loaded). Flying one person from Virginia to Spain uses around 60 US gallons of ~diesel.

Airliners, like them or not, are integral to the economy while pleasure sailing is not. Consider all the diesel burned not just in sailboat engines and generators, but in sea/aircraft making fumes to rescue pleasure sailors in peril. This is a huge amount of fuel. Airliners can/do move stuff quickly great distances (e.g. across oceans) somewhat irrespective of pleasure airline travel. So for all the ~carbon footprint associated with huge airplanes, some amount of that carbon footprint is globally accepted.

Me in my sailboat vs me in my cabin in the woods.....my sailboat, and others like it, produce an unnecessary huge carbon footprint. But I suppose I'm not supposed to think this way in this kind of discussion.

Wow, now there's some perspective! (if your math is correct). Gord -- there's another answer for you.

No, you're not supposed to use logic & reason in discussions like this when feelings & emotions are far more preferable. I suspect this is why it's difficult for some of us to get behind such issues. Some people view Greta's efforts as important, useful and even inspiring, while others view it as superficial, unrealistic and even as a mere publicity stunt. It's kinda like those who advocate the elimination of plastic straws to address the problem of plastic pollution in the oceans. The strong reactions (yea & nay) often have little to do with how people feel about the underlying issue's merits, and everything about their particular personality makeup. It does make it difficult to achieve any sort of consensus, however, with conflict often the result.

[Wallaby]

Originally Posted by Budawang

Rightists are so easily triggered. A 16 year old girl passionately and sincerely expresses her opinions and they go apoplectic. The thing is Greta has science on her side. As the evidence mounts, rightists just have increasingly bizarre conspiracy theories and narcissistic cult-like figures to sustain them.

If Greta is not a 'cult-like' figure, I don't know who is. That said, I defend her right to express her opinion, however, I react strongly against closed minds. SCIENCE REQUIRES AN OPEN MIND.



For example, how does one test the hypothesis of man-caused global climate change? Clearly, climate changes over time. The existence and effect of solar cycles is proof of that.



NOW, if the climate was warming, we could test that by looking at the increase in mean temperatures over time, the longer the better. There is a reason why global warming was changed to global climate change.


Now, for climate CHANGE, we would test the hypothesis by looking at the variance in mean temperatures over time compared to some base variance over time. The variance should increase (statistically) to support the hypothesis. We'd need to eliminate non-man causes of climate change, for example, solar cycles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle).


The variance test is exceedingly difficult at a global level. Do ten or 20 years of data constitute a valid sample for 'climate' change? No! Fifty years, maybe.


Personally, I have no doubt that humans affect the planet. There are simply too many of us not to. However, right now, climate change cannot be validated. Instead, we are confronted by anecdotal evidence and politics purporting to be science.



This is not a 'bizarre conspiracy theory,' simply statistics and common sense.