Lemdro.id

3 points

10 months ago

You have never seen any impact because you’re trying to mash your hands over your ears and close your eyes. I literally just told you the an impact she’s had on my family and you still don’t recognise an impact.

Of course, I’m sure anecdotes mean nothing to you, so look further at the awards, media attention, speeches, international demonstrations that started with her. Zero impact? Jesus, we are having this conversation because of her.

Honestly, if you can’t imagine that this particular household name, face of Time magazine and organiser of global protests has had any impact at all, you probably also believe that the moon landing was faked, the election was stolen, the earth is flat, and there’s no helping your unhealthy relationship with bad takes.

report

[ - ]

Neuromancer@lemm.ee

-8 points

10 months ago

Jesus, we are having this conversation because of her.

Yes, how damaging she is to the cause. Due to her it’s been hard to get any politician to listen because of her nutty behavior.

While it seems to have swayed you, she has t swayed American discussion on the topic.

report

[ - ]

3 points

10 months ago

Unfortunately, that says more about American discussion - America has moved beyond left Vs right to reality Vs “alternative facts”. For example, climate change denialism, large vaccines cause autism, the election fraud nonsense. Unfortunately, given that opportunistic morons like America’s republican party have politicised and denied climate change, I’m sure they’ll be a segment of the population that will blame anything, including Greta.

So yes, I do agree with you that the large anti science wing of America wouldn’t warm to her, but they never would have.

report

[ - ]

Neuromancer@lemm.ee

-4 points

10 months ago

So yes, I do agree with you that the large anti science wing of America wouldn’t warm to her, but they never would have

I never said such a thing. Nice straw man.

report

[ - ]

2 points

10 months ago

You’re right, I apologise I didn’t represent your view fairly, we don’t fully agree, though I maintain we agree that America hasn’t fully embraced Greta.

I disagree that it’s that no American politicians warm to her and her loud behaviour (which is what put her in the spotlight). Biden for example said to Trump: "What kind of president bullies a teenager? @realDonaldTrump, you could learn a few things from Greta on what it means to be a leader,”. Doesn’t sound like he’s too dismissive of Greta’s behaviour, does it?

In fact, it’s generally down the left/right, truth/fiction party line, since Greta conveniently represents climate change/truth.

report

[ - ]

Neuromancer@lemm.ee

-7 points

10 months ago

her loud behaviour

That’s part of her turn off but Americans in general don’t like others tell us what to do.

Climate change is a complex topic as many people don’t want to admit it’s happening. To me it’s obvious it happening and arguing about the cause is stupid.

Even if it’s not man made, nuclear power, solar power, electric cars, etc all help with the pollution and the environment. Everyone should be for that. It shouldn’t be political. It should be common sense.

That’s why I dont like Greta. She puts the focus on her and make people polarized on the topic. The debate turns to her, rather than the solution.

I’m not sure it’s man made or not. Doesn’t really matter to me. I’d rather live in a world with less pollution and less fracking.

report

[ - ]

2 points

10 months ago

Nobody likes being told what to do, but when it affects others, it unfortunately becomes necessary, even for Americans. For example, if an someone wanted to punch you in the mouth or take your things, they would be told not to do that, as it affects others. If people affect billions of future lives through probably terrible choices, I’ll join in telling them what to do. I’m very big on liberty, but your liberty ends where mine begins.

Most reasonable people admit climate change is happening, which is the disconnect with American republicans is (only a quarter consider it to be a major threat), and I think while protesters like Greta can help get the word around generally, there’s little way of reaching genuinely unreasonable people.

Climate change and its causes should only really be up for serious debate by climate scientists, as uninformed pundits with bad takes just convince idiots into conclusions which hurt all of us. However, I disagree with you about whether the cause is anthropogenic is important, as a misunderstanding of that truth steers the misinformed towards a resigned apathy that it’s not our fault and can’t be changed. For the record, the cause is man made and more than 99.9% of peer-reviewed scientific papers agree. It should be continually challenged and refined, but by people who have spent their lives studying it at the highest levels.

That said, it’s great to hear of your wishes for reduced pollution, safer energy production and cleaner transport, as they are aligned with a better tomorrow.

report